Philip "Mitch" Brailsford, a Mesa police officer, was wearing a body camera when he shot and killed Daniel Shaver in January 2016. Brailsford was later charged with Shaver's murder.
Mesa Police Department

Defense attorney Michael Piccarreta and defendant Philip "Mitch" Brailsford talk after a hearing 10/21/16 in which they advocated for a 2nd hearing on whether there was probable cause to charge Brailsford. Garrett Mitchell/azcentral.com

Former Mesa police Officer Philip "Mitch" Brailsford sits in Maricopa County Superior Court in Phoenix on May 16, 2016, during a preliminary hearing. Brailsford is accused of second-degree murder in the fatal shooting of Daniel Shaver in a Mesa hotel.(Photo: Tom Tingle/The Republic)

Opening statements are set to begin 10:30 a.m. Wednesday in the trial of a former Mesa police officer charged with second-degree murder in an on-duty shooting.

Philip "Mitch" Brailsford, 26, shot and killed Daniel Shaver while responding to a call about a man with a gun at a Mesa hotel in January 2016.

The trial being held in Maricopa County Superior Court is expected to last 16 days.

Fatal shooting at Mesa hotel

Brailsford was fired from the Mesa Police Department in March 2016, shortly after prosecutors concluded the shooting was not justified and he was charged.

On Jan. 18, 2016, Mesa officers responded to a report of a man waving a gun out of a window at a Mesa La Quinta Inn.

Shaver, a pest-control worker who was in his hotel room drinking, had shown two visitors a pellet gun he used for work, the police report says.

After police called him out of the room, he was on his hands and knees, saying, "Please don't shoot me," according to Mesa police documents. Shaver then made a movement with his hands near his waistband, indicating he may have been armed, police say.

Brailsford, who was among several officers at the scene, fired five times, killing the man.

Debate over showing body-cam video

Last week, Judge George Foster heard arguments from the prosecution and defense about whether to allow the jury during opening statements to see a police on-body camera recording showing the killing. A second issue was whether the jury would be allowed to hear that there was a handgun in Shaver's work truck.

Foster ruled Tuesday that the jury will be able to watch the video during opening statements, Brailsford's lawyer, Michael Piccarreta, told The Arizona Republic.

The Maricopa County Attorney's Office also confirmed the ruling for The Republic.

Piccarreta filed a motion Tuesday asking the judge that the media and public not be allowed to air the video until after an acquittal or sentencing.

Earlier, she had told the judge that Brailsford's body-camera recording is admissible evidence and she should be allowed to show the video in her opening statement.

Piccarreta countered that showing the video is prejudicial to his client.

During arguments on the issue, Foster said the law usually doesn't allow either the prosecution or the defense to show evidence during an opening statement. But he added that he may allow Deputy Maricopa County Attorney Susie Charbel to show an edited version of the video.

The judge also said that repeatedly showing the video to the jury could be prejudicial to Brailsford's right to a fair trial.

"Showing this video over and over again, it's like showing gory pictures," he said. "After a while, it becomes prejudicial, and the court is sensitive to that issue."

Charbel said the video isn't graphic and she doesn't plan on showing any footage in slow motion during her opening.

Whether the video is shown during an opening statement or during the course of the trial, it will be the first time an unedited version of it will be shown publicly.

The video had been at the center of legal wrangling last year. An edited version of it eventually was released but did not show the actual shooting.

Should jury hear about gun?

Piccarreta also told the judge that he wants to be allowed to tell the jury that Shaver had a handgun inside of a safe in his work truck when police shot him. But earlier this week, the judge ruled this was irrelevant to the case.

Piccarreta had told the judge this was relevant because it supports his argument that Brailsford shot Shaver out of fear that he may have had a gun.

Charbel said the gun belonged to Shaver's father-in-law, that he didn't know the combination number to the safe and that it's unreasonable to think that Shaver could have reached for the gun.